Uniqlo is increasingly known for its clean-cut and gender neutral fashion.
But how does it perform when it comes to workers’ rights, the environment and animal welfare?
Our research highlights several ethical issues with Uniqlo, including allegations of forced labour in its cotton supply chains, inadequate animal welfare policies, and a lack of clear steps to cut its climate impacts.
Below we outline some of these issues. To see the full detailed stories, and Uniqlo’s overall ethical rating, please sign in or subscribe.
When it comes to the workers’ rights of those producing its clothing, Uniqlo’s owner, Fast Retailing, has relatively strong policies in place covering the company. Its supplier code of conduct outlines vital expectations for suppliers, such as no use of forced labour and freedom to join a trade union or organise for better rights.
Fast Retailing has also published details of all of its direct suppliers, as well as some fabric mills and factories that do subcontracted work like washing and printing. This is considered an important step towards transparency so workers and civil society can hold companies accountable.
However, the company has also faced one very serious allegation when it comes to human rights abuses in its supply chain. In 2023, human rights groups filed legal complaints against a number of fast fashion brands including Uniqlo France, which they said were profiting from forced labour of the Uyghur ethnic minority in China.
Uyghur people have been subject to state sanction forced labour working in the cotton industry in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of China. According to an article in Le Monde, “Allegations made in the complaint filed on Tuesday include crimes against humanity, aggravated reduction to servitude, genocide and human trafficking.”
A Fast Retailing spokesperson told Nikkei Asia that none of the companies' manufacturing process was in Xinjiang. The spokesperson said that it has "a zero-tolerance policy toward any human rights violation.” They added that although the group had not been contacted by French authorities by early June, Fast Retailing would "cooperate fully with the investigation to reaffirm there is no forced labour" in its supply chain.
Uniqlo’s owner Fast Retailing performs badly on environmental issues – receiving 0/100 in Ethical Consumer’s climate rating.
In November 2023, Ethical Consumer found that the company had provided inadequate information on how it was reducing its emissions. The company discussed a fleece made from recycled bottle and clothes repairs in stores, amongst other things, but did not provide a comprehensive climate plan. It did not appear to report on its emissions or have a target in line with crucial international climate goals.
In 2023, environmental advocacy organisation Stand.earth published a ‘Fossil Free Fashion Scorecard’, rating companies’ attempts to reduce their fossil fuel dependency. Uniqlo’s owner Fast Retailing scored D-, and the organisation stated: "Fast Retailing has acted slowly to phase down fossil fuel based fabrics, increase closed-loop apparel-to apparel recycling for synthetics, and switch to 100% organic cotton. It has not engaged in any discernible renewable energy advocacy during the 2023 Scorecard period.”
Ethical Consumer has also looked at Uniqlo and Fast Retailings policies and practices on animal rights and welfare issues.
Uniqlo sells a large range of animal products. While its owner Fast Retailing has some animal welfare policies in place, in November 2023, Ethical Consumer found that it lacked policies to prevent some of the worst welfare outcomes for the animals involved. For example, it sold leather without a leather policy (only excluding exotic animal skins).
Fast Retailing lacks transparency when it comes to financial ethics – failing to disclose its directors’ pay in its 2022 annual report.
However, it is unlikely to be involved in tax avoidance tactics.[p] While the company has a number of subsidiaries in tax havens such as the Netherlands and Hong Kong, these all appeared to be legitimate apparel and clothing companies serving the local population, so were not considered high risk for tax avoidance.
The text above was written June 2024, and most research was conducted in November 2023.
Ethical Consumer Best Buy: No
Boycotts: No
The stories for this company are only available to subscribers.
To access all of our tools and data - and get the Ethical Consumer print magazine - start your subscription today.